Two More Years

If the 2006 elections were a rebuke against an unpopular George Bush, I believe that in much the same way the 2008 elections will be his ultimate repudiation. Democrats would do well to remember that President Bush is deeply unpopular and the wave of disatisfaction which carried them to victory last November has yet to crash into shore. George Bush has rededicated himself to defying the better counsel of nearly everyone from lifetime foreign policy and military men to the wishes of typical American working class voters, as consistently shown by polls. Some Dems may believe that they need to temper their message to "lock in" the votes of those who may have switched affilations, but this is misguided thinking. Instead of looking to emasculate their message for a few swing voters, they should consider all the evidence that shows the youth vote to be more Democratic than its been in a while. It would be unwise to disappoint those new voters.

The National Review's Mission Statement

"This then is one choice before you, before us. We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow; and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in our hearts, deploring maybe evils done by the way, but approving the high and ultimate purpose: Knowledge, Rule, Order; all the things that we have so far striven in vain to accomplish, hindered rather than helped by our weak and idle friends. There need not be, there would not be, any real change in our designs, only in our means."

- Saruman the White, channelling present neo-consevative conventional wisdom.


It's no wonder Tolkien's elves grieved so unceasingly. They must have grown tired of hearing the same self-serving nonsense over and over and over again, age after age after age.

Happy Christmas

Have a safe and blessed holiday!

Celine Dion

The recent Celine Dion/Anastasia "cover" of AC/DC's You Shook Me All Night Long in Las Vegas (where else?) is getting a surprising amount of attention. Don't get me wrong here, it's real bad - especially the very beginning where Celine plays air guitar on what I can only imagine to be an apparition of Derek Smalls many-necked bass. But the fact remains that however badly the aforementioned duo butchers the spirit of the song, I am obliged to admit that they are both capable singers. In addition, even intentions as misguided as these cannot hope to sully the innate rock and roll awesomeness of the song itself. In other words, they might have tried their best to ruin it, but in that endeavor they had as much hope for success as a tag-team raid of Constantinople. So good for a laugh at Celine's expense I guess, but worthy of so much remark? I'm not so sure about that.

Nevertheless, Celine Dion is indeed one of the most frightening beings in the cosmos, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the video below.

Let's just say that if I was a member of this unfortunate family, the next thing you would have seen was a cloud of dust and a hole in the wall roughly shaped like my silhouette.

Iraqi New Deal

Is George Bush the President of the USA or is he President of Iraq? The Iraqi New Deal??? Please. How come all these so-called conservatives turn into big-government liberals the very instant the subject of Iraq comes up. "Let's quick voice vote this $10 billion Iraqi public works build-a-thon, but $3 billion for new levees in New Orleans? I don't know, guys, isn't that a lot of money? How can the people of New Orleans learn to be responsible if we build their levees for them?"

Why does the GOP hate America?

Funny Ladies

Remember that ridiculous Chris Hitchens column a while back where he said that women aren't funny? ("not until right now, Horatio, thanks")

Anyway, he must not read Go Fug Yourself very often. It's one of the most consistently hilarious reads on the web. Written by two women, of course. Must be a fluke, eh Hitch?

Virgil Goode

When I read the following quote from Virgil Goode,

"I am for restricting immigration so that we don't have a majority of Muslims elected to the House of Representatives."

I wonder which would be worse for him, or rather, which "nightmare scenario" would he be more prepared to tolerate: a) the USA under a totalitarian Christian dictator or b) the current system of government with a 100% Muslim House, Senate, Presidency, and Supreme Court.

I'd have to wait for Virgil to give me his answer on this one, because I'm honestly not sure which one he'd pick.

P.S. For the record, I myself do not consider option 'b' to be a "nightmare scenario."

Fit To Print

Am I the only person in the world who doesn't care in the slightest about what happens in that stupid Duke rape case? I must be in the extreme minority here seeing as it is front page news for nearly every media outlet in America. I can't really blame the newspapers. They're just giving the people want they want, I suppose, just trying to make a buck. It's the interest that really baffles me. If lurid detail is what you're after, just go to the local Walgreens and buy a 99 cent harlequin novel.

Plymouth, Indiana

To the left is picture of beautiful downtown Plymouth, Indiana. One of my very few readers (after I alienated just about everyone with an unexplained - to this day - 7 month hiatus) hails from this splendid burg in the north of the Hoosier State. I learned from wikipedia (which was also so kind as to provide the photo) that Scott Skiles, present head coach of the Chicago Bulls, led his Plymouth H.S. basketball team to the 1982 state title with a thrilling one point overtime victory. Go Plymouth!!!

Party Poker

I just tried to access my Party Poker account to play a little hold 'em before bed. I was hoping to get in a no-limit tournament and have some fun. Instead, I am greeted with a message that informs me U.S. accounts may no longer place wagers on the website. I heard about this crap piece of legislation a few months back but for some reason I was still shocked when it became obvious (after lots of clicking) that I cannot play poker online anymore. Thanks GOP!

No Goal

A rare moment of truth from President George Bush:

As he searches for a new strategy for Iraq, Bush has now adopted the formula advanced by his top military adviser to describe the situation. "We're not winning, we're not losing," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post.

This is the first thing Bush has said in a long time that I have agreed with. The terms "winning" and "losing" only have meaning in the context of either meeting or not meeting stated military objectives. Since we have no military goals in Iraq, then it is correct to say that we are neither reaching nor failing to reach those goals.

Figuring Things Out Is Cool

My favorite line in an otherwise mildly interesting article about how mental exercises benefit the brain:

Researchers noted that mental skills can sometimes compensate for physical disabilities: Knowing how to figure out directions and find a new route on a map, for example, could allow someone to retain mobility even after their night vision deteriorates to the point where driving on certain roads becomes difficult.

I just love it. In other news, it has been theorized that the mental skills of humans allowed them to "outwit" such brawny creatures as sabertooth tigers, wooly mammoths, and grizzly bears.

Head On

George Bush Presents: Popular Ideas

This is just a genius post by Upyernoz.

thirty-seven percent of americans believe the u.s. government has been secretly contacted by aliens

sixteen percent of americans believe that the u.s. government planted explosives that brought down the world trade center.

twelve percent of americans think the u.s. should have a british-style royal family.

eleven percent of americans in 2003 would like to have "dr. quinn, medicine woman" as their personal physician

ten percent of americans would eat a rat or insect if it meant they could be on tv.

and eleven percent of americans support sending more troops to iraq. (emphasis mine)

Sort of puts it in perspective. I wonder if George Bush voted for Dr. Quinn: Medicine Woman, too.

Cash Crop

Marijuana is the number one cash crop in the state of California. The report was put together by a medical marijuana advocacy group, so pass the salt. But even if marijuana is not actually number one, I doubt that the study is so biased that it takes a nowhere crop and just sticks it at the top. In other words, marijuana is towards the top of the list in a state that produces a lot of agricultural goods. One thing I question, though, is this sentiment, which I do attribute to a bit of an agenda:

"Agriculturally, it's worth the same as alfalfa, which is six cents a pound right now, which would make the total crop, if it wasn't illegal, about 1.3 million as opposed to 35 billion."

Perhaps the fact that's it's illegal is inflating the cost, but an increase by a factor of 27,000 seems a bit high. That's gotta be a typo. They must have meant 1.3 billion. Even then, I'm skeptical. I'd imagine that cannabis would be a tad more lucrative than alfafa. Cannabis is, after all, a remarkably useful plant. I think that many medical marijuana advocates purposely play down the recreational side to the substance to avoid scaring off would-be supporters. Which is understandable, I suppose, but nevertheless strange, since no one ever feels the need to play down the recreational side (hey, wait, that's the only side there is!) of alcohol.

On that note, I was encouraged to see this particular phraseology in the piece:

Anti-prohibition advocates say classifying marijuana as illegal is the problem.

Glad to see they're calling a spade a spade.

I E Don't you miss this opportunity!!!

I hope this wasn't someone's idea of a joke, although I seriously doubt an editor could be so dense as to let it slip by him or her. Here's the choice cut.

Civil war or not, Iraq has an economy, and—mother of all surprises—it's doing remarkably well. Real estate is booming.

Let me see if I've got this here. You're saying that in spite of the exploding real estate, real estate is exploding?

12-sided salute to Attaturk for the link.

Petty Dislikes

I don't know about any of you guys, but I absolutely HATE IT when my waiter at whatever restaurant starts me off with a "so, is this your first time to Buffalo Wild Wings??" "Have you ever been to The Olive Garden before??" I almost always answer, "yes, I come here once a month," even if it is my actual first time, which it usually is, since having had this question put to me means I will be ruling out a return. Maybe this petty dislike is just an offshoot of my general loathing of chain restaurants (for the most part, they are indistinguishable from fast food). The notion that I will require, beyond what can be gleaned from the menu in under 4 seconds, special knowledge to order the "bottomless pasta" is honestly too much for me to bear.

Principles

1776: Give me liberty or give me death!

2006: Liberty? Just please oh please don't kill me!!!

Via TPM

Moratorium

Kudos to Jeb Bush for halting executions in Florida after the botched lethal injection last week. I'm no fan of Jeb, but this seems like a much better response then his brother George's shoulder shrugging in Texas. Why were we saddled with George again?? No wonder Poppy broke down.

P.S. a "moratorium" on the death penalty is kind of ironic, eh?

You just can't reason with a genocidal maniac

Amazing as it seems, there are still those who think that MORE WAR in MORE PLACES will solve our problems in Iraq and with the issue of global terrorism. Glenn Greenwald links to some real nutcases who believe that acting "tougher" and bombing more places is the answer. It's hard to determine exactly what their thought process must be to come to such a conclusion, but I'll give it a shot.

First, I myself believe, and I'm sure the wingers would agree, that invading Iraq with an army of 1 million soldiers would have produced a different result than the one we see today. I'm not sure it would have been necessarily more successful, but I can't help but think that security, at least in the early stages, would have been substantially better. Perhaps if the urban environment was less of a free-for-all in the days after Saddam's fall, more Iraqis would have dared to risk their safety on a gamble that the Americans were serious about rebuilding their country. We knew this already of course, because the generals had told us. The only problem with this line of reasoning is that putting together a million soldier army was simply impossible. We may as well conjecture what an invasion of space alien soldiers would have been like.

I'm sure a lot of the wingers look to WWII as the golden age of our military and proof that we can fight all these wars at the same time and win them all. Some profound luck on our side notwithstanding (Battle of Midway, Hitlers decision to invade Russia thus starting a land war in Asia), this is true. We are the strongest nation in the world and can do far more militarily than any other nation. There are reasons, however, that a comparison of now and then cannot honestly be made. In 1942, this country mobilized for war in a way the world had never seen. Even the German war machine was no match for us once we got it going. The entire military and economic might of our great nation backed the war effort. The wingers then will say, "yes yes that's what I'm talking about! we need to mobilize!" Well, again going back to WWII, I'm reminded of a story about my grandfather. He wanted so badly to help the Allies smash Hitler's armies that he went and joined the CANADIAN Air Force because the US hadn't entered the war yet. People really did WANT to fight in WWII. Men enlisted by the hundreds and thousands.

So why not the same for Iraq? The wingers will say that media pessimism suppressed the patriotic urge to fight for "freedom," but anyone who can remember 2002 knows this is not true. This country was in an extended patriotic orgasm for God's sake. The president's approval numbers were through the roof. But when it came to war with Iraq, the public never bought it. From the get go the effort was doomed. Americans wanted to cheer their flag, but we just didn't think Iraq was worth risking our lives over. We were never going to able to mobilize for this thing. What's worse is that we were never even asked to. So now the fashion is to blame lack of success in Iraq on the American people for their insufficient will to fight. Maybe if Jonah Goldberg were saying this between security sorties in Fallujah I'd take him seriously. Jonah's famous excuse that he "has kids" doesn't fly. If it's important enough, everyone fights. Heck, Ted Williams fought in WWII. He's the best hitter in baseball history. Freaking Elvis fought!

The second, and probably more accurate, way to interpret the wingers thought process on more war is simply as an extermination fantasy. They don't want to fight, they don't want more troops. They just want more Muslims to die. This is the "more rubble, less trubble" camp, to quote a disgusting phrase I saw on Instapundit once. They'll talk and talk and talk about resolve and "kicking-ass" and toughness and moral clarity and all that noise, but what they really want in their heart of hearts is for all the scary terrorists to die. And since you don't know how to distinguish the scary terrorists from regular brown Muslim people, the best idea is to just kill them all. The discussion of how to reduce the causes of terror is totally uninteresting to them. The only thing they want to talk about is how to completely eliminate the populations from which the terrorists tend to spring.

Betrayal

Upyernoz has a great post linking to an LA Times oped piece. The basic thrust of it is that we have the moral obligation to grant asylum to those Iraqis who have risked their lives by daring to work with Americans. If you have been living under a rock for the past year, you may not know that Iraqis who are exposed as collaborators are routinely captured, tortured, and killed. These are patriots who take the fate of their country very seriously. We owe them safety at the very least. They have been doubly betrayed by George Bush, first because they're basically thrown to the wolves once their identity is uncovered and, secondly (and this is perhaps the more profound betrayal) because Bush has never been serious about the fate of Iraq.

If only to encourage more Iraqis to help us over there, it would be wise to have an asylum program in place. But since that would be a policy that would actually cohere to stated American goals for Iraq, it has next to zero chance of happening.

Priorities

There's a post over at TPM about a recent immigration raid that nabbed about 1,300 Mexicans. For the most part, those apprehended in the raid will be deported. The sad part is that the vast majority of illegal immigrants want nothing more than to work hard, feed their children, and take care of their families - something that is clearly impossible for them in their home country. And if they were citizens, they'd be gladly paying their taxes, too. As it is, we'll just have to be content with them buying American products and paying rent to American landlords. That is, if we're not deporting them en masse.

But here's the really depressing part: no charges were filed against Swift, the American meatpacking company who had illegally hired them. Of course. It makes perfect sense.

Nauseating

I really don't know what to say. These are just sick, depraved, morally bankrupt people. They glibly flap their gums on TV and type their twisted columns and they joke about 30 mm shells piercing skulls and people's tongues being cut out of their mouths. Jonah Goldberg is rotten to his very core. What a repellent creature he is.

To hearken back to the days of pre-calculus, perhaps the Lowry Limit does not exist.

New Original Flavor!!!

Once again, the same old nonsense is given an extreme semantic make-over, and, no doubt filled with glee at the opportunity to print another meaningless article on Iraq, the Pinochet Post prints it. Stupidity ensues.

The nation's top uniformed leaders are recommending that the United States change its main military mission in Iraq from combating insurgents to supporting Iraqi troops and hunting terrorists, said sources familiar with the White House's ongoing Iraq policy review.

Huh? Exactly what is the difference between "combating insurgents" and "hunting terrorists?" Haven't they been "terrorists" the whole time? Isn't that who we're fighting over there so as not to fight them here? The worst part is that unless the preceeding was a quote, print-bloggers Robin Wright and Ann Scott Tyson are purposely and directly engaging in the kind of obfuscation that serves this sputtering war policy so well.

President Bush and Vice President Cheney met with the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff yesterday at the Pentagon for more than an hour, and the president engaged his top military advisers on different options.

Well, certainly glad to hear that the boys might have worked through lunch on this one.

Sources said that Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is reviewing a plan to redefine the American military mission there: U.S. troops would be pulled out of Iraqi cities and consolidated at a handful of U.S. bases while day-to-day combat duty would be turned over to the Iraqi army. Casey is still considering whether to request more troops, possibly as part of an expanded training mission to help strengthen the Iraqi army.

Two things: a) how is "strengthening" (with weights?) the Iraqi army, "turning over" combat duty to the Iraqis, "expanding" the training mission in any way a REDEFINITION of our current aims? Haven't we been talking about "standing down as they stand up" for three years now?, b) the people shooting at Americans are doing so because they want to shoot Americans. Replacing them with Iraqis would probably mean they would stop shooting. Which means this is probably a good idea, but not for the reasons Gen. Casey thinks.

Lowry Limit

Over the course of the last half-decade (my God has it been that long?), I have been amazed at the willingness of certain conservative commentators to systematically abandon their principles as they are forced to make one exception after another for the shocking behavior of the Bush presidency. And that got me to wondering: what would be the one thing that Bush could do that would cause even his most unquestioning supporters to drop away? Having the military seize control of the Treasury? Burning down the Capitol? Perhaps placing the heads of suspected terrorists on stakes surrounding the White House? Honestly, there have been so many times where I was sure that This Was It, this was the moment where even the Rich Lowry's and Hugh Hewitt's of the world would take a step back and say, "hold on now. I don't care how good your intentions are, this is America and you just can't do that here." But after all that's happened, after all the fundamentally un-American things Bush has done and encouraged, most of Bush's public supporters still are solidly in his camp. So I ask (rhetorically of course), what is the limit, the Lowry Limit if you will, the thing that will finally be too much?

Michigan got the shaft

After Michigan's 3-point loss to Ohio State in Columbus last month, my take was "Well, the Wolverines had their chance. Someone else should get a shot at the title." So what do I think of that thought process today? Total BS. For two reasons. First, and I'm surprised I didn't think of it at the time, if Michigan had won, were we really going to deny the Buckeyes an opportunity to win the title? Hell, no. They were so CLEARLY the class of college football, it would have been insane to leave them out. So, if Michigan wins in Columbus, the National Championship Game would have been UM vs. OSU. No question. So why expect a different result if OSU wins? And given that OSU's victory was by only 3 at home (which is really just the homefield talking) didn't both these teams prove themselves to be pretty evenly matched? When the Wolverines utterly DESTROY the USC Trojans in the Rose Bowl (in yet another away-game bowl-game for the Big Ten), you'll see what I mean. They'll be playing for one reason alone, to prove that they should have been playing for the title. Secondly, Bruce Hooley at ESPN.com makes a good point about Florida's supposed right to play for the title. When the Gators won their only National Title back in 1996, their own title game was, you guessed it, a rematch. They got to play the FSU Seminoles in the final game of the year, a team that had beat them earlier that season. So screw the Gators and their precious shot at the championship. The best two teams are the ones that get to play for all the marbles. That a club that Florida just isn't in.

Locked Up

The woman who stabbed her two kids (ages 3 and 9) over 200 times each, was recently found to be insane. I've posted about this before, but my two reactions to this kind of thing are as follows: a) well duh!, and b) who cares? Hopefully, this psycho will be under lock and key for the rest of her natural life. What does it matter to me whether she's wearing stripes or a straitjacket? If she needs help while locked up, then help her, but this is a pretty minor detail in the grand scheme. The main point is to prevent her misfiring cortex from ever again telling her arm to stab a child 200 times. I'd say the set of people most likely to do such a thing includes the subset of people who've already done it!!!

Haloscan

I just got Haloscan working on the new Blogger template. I am quite proud of myself to say the least. Major credit goes to Logical Philosopher for the help.

Deficit Spending

I agree with the basic premise here, that the conservatives of today have, far more than their predecessors, made common cause with the Moral Socialists. But is this really the reason why polling shows that the public trusts Democrats more on "federal spending and the deficit?"

In a Newsweek poll just before the election, 47 percent of respondents said they trusted the Democrats more on "federal spending and the deficit," compared to just 31 percent who trusted the Republicans. That's not Ronald Reagan's Republican Party"

As you can see for yourself, Andrew Sullivan links to a guy who declares today's GOP not to be "Ronald Reagan's Republican Party." Are you quite sure? Ronald Reagan's great domestic legacy, and really the only material thing that Republicans have contributed to the political sphere over the last century, is deficit spending. Are we supposed to be surprised that the Bush Administration has continued this dubious Republican tradition?

Mary Cheney

First of all, congrats to Mary Cheney and her partner. I know what its like to be expecting a child and it is indeed a special time. But, not missing their chance to rain on a parade, a number of conservative columnists and commentators have complained that Cheney's baby will somehow be deprived of its childhood. I have also heard that her pregnancy is a "selfish" act. All I can say to that is anyone who could entertain such a notion has no idea what pregnancy is about. Carrying a child to term is undeniably a self-LESS act. A woman is essentially sharing her lifeforce with another living being. As I finish up yet another book about WWI, let's just say that this is not exactly the M.O. of the world at large.

I think at the heart of all this hand wringing is a sense of helplessness on the part of the Moral Socialists. Since the Moral Socialists thrive on vagaries and nearly always stumble when they wade into the reeds and cattails of their own proposed policies. They feel empowered to oppose gay adoption at every turn because it can be simplified into an abstract evil, but when a lesbian couple actually conceives a child, obviously its a little tougher poitically to advocate removing said child from the custody of its biological mother.

Still, on the adoption issue, I like what Dan Savage has to say. Basically, it's OK if you're going to try to argue that a child adopted by a gay couple is worse off than one adopted by a hetero couple. I don't agree with that statement, but I'm not going to spend my time proving something that would take years and years of study to prove. There probably are studies like that going on right now. And even when the results come out and show me to be correct, let me predict that the gay-haters won't exactly be conviced. The real question to ask is this: since there are more kids than parents willing to adopt them, is it preferable for a child to go unadopted than to be raised in a single-sex household?

Taking Sides

I just want to get this out there for the public record: if it's true that Dick Cheney is looking to pick a side in the civil war in Iraq, if it actually happens that US troops are ordered to align themselves with Shia forces and antagonize the Sunni, then that decision will eclipse even the original decision to invade Iraq in the breadth of its idiocy. It may even end up the single dumbest thing this country will ever do.

David Frum, Canadian

Earth to David Frum: Princess Diana is (was) NOT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. Just to clarify, FISA laws only pertain to AMERICAN CITIZENS. If you are not an AMERICAN CITIZEN, then the American government can tap your phone all day long. Perhaps they shouldn't, but no law's being broken if they do. Again, spying on AMERICAN CITIZENS is very different from spying on NON-AMERICAN CITIZENS because doing the former is illegal and doing the latter is not governed by any existing US laws. Please no more "breaking" stories about how Jimmy Carter bugged the Shah of Iran's brick-phone, or how JFK bugged Khruschev's proto-pager. Why not? Because those stories are irrelevant because neither guy was an AMERICAN CITIZEN. Geez.

Public opinion

I'd love it if just one Democrat got on the TEE-VEE and declared in one of those split-screen debates that the other dude was an extremist for wanting to continue military engagement in Iraq. There is only one takeaway from this latest CBS poll. That the mainstream position is to bring the troops home immediately. This has actually been the case for a while now, but at this point you'd have to be seriously dense not to notice. The CW that only the Dirty F-ing Hippies, to use Atrios' phraseology, support immediate withdrawal from Iraq needs to be clubbed like a baby seal.

Pundit

Interesting note: the word "pundit" comes from the Hindi word "pandit," which means "person esteemed for his or her wisdom and learning." I will now stop referring to these screen-tested bozos as pundits.


Not a pundit.

Jefferson

If the Democrats are going to seize the moral high ground on the corruption issue, they absolutely must go hard after this guy. To be honest, I'm glad he won, if for no other reason than now the Democrats have bipartisan cover if they decide to blitz Congress with a wave of corruption hearings. And I'm sure there are Democrats other than Jefferson that deserve to be pilloried, but none have been placed on the tee quite like the Member from Louisiana's 2nd congressional district.

Let down

The pundit class, claiming that the great mass of unwashed has in some way let its government down, keeps verbally shivving the American public for their lack of support for war. Leaving aside the more general question of whether it is even possible for a populace to let down its government, how could this be true? I wonder how it could be that I myself, now standing in as representative for the public, was the great obstacle between my (MY!) government and glorious victory in Iraq if I was NOT EVEN ASKED to support the war effort in any material way. I'm not talking about wilfully believing the propaganda and clapping loudly for my heroes and other such poppycock that these TV warriors think is important. I mean real, actual support like paying higher taxes, working longer hours, going without certain products, in other words, MOBILIZING FOR WAR. No one ever asked me to do this. No one, I don't believe, even suggested it. And if no one ever asked me to change my lifestyle in order to support a war effort, how on earth could I have ever let anyone down??? But instead of tax increases, we got tax cuts. Instead of rationing goods, we got orders to go shopping. We weren't being asked to support the war, WE WERE BEING ASKED TO IGNORE IT.

My answer would still have been no, by the way.

Jared

Going with my gut here, but I think Jared might be gaining some of the weight back. I just saw a commercial where it was he and Michael Strahan yukking it up about some crazy choice of toppings and I thought I detected a nascent (or resurrected?) double-chin.

Whistleblower

The soldier who blew the whistle on government approved torture at Abu Ghraib is reaping what is so often the reward for courage: the contempt of his peers.

Says Engelbach, "I agree that his actions…were no good and borderline traitor." He understands Darby was reporting a crime. "But do you put the enemy above your buddies? I wouldn’t."

I just can't get my head around the thought process of people who think that talking about or admitting a crime is worse than the crime itself. If you are a soldier, your duty is to defend America, not your buddies.

Blogger Beta

I switched. Not sure how much I like it. A bit easier on the eyes I think. The old font was too small and looking into a dark blue background gave me a headache after a while.

Terror = Hate crime

I've always been a little wary of how the word "terrorist" is used in common language these days. It mainly acts as an emotional trigger which, in many people, effectively switches off any normal expectation of due process. The case of Jose Padilla offers a pretty clear example. Once he was branded a terrorist, he was, in the minds of many Americans, properly relegated to an alternate system of justice. The idea seems to be: "Terrorists are evil enemies who do not deserve to participate in our legal system." The point is not that acts of terror aren't evil and destructive acts (they are), just that the climate is such today that when we say the word "terrorist" there is a fundamental shift in what many people regard to be the correct way to deal with the perpetrator. A jury trial is "too good" for such people. Send them to GITMO and beat the bejesus out of them.

This is odd to me, since I don't think many people have any complaint with how Timothy McVeigh was dealt with. Sure maybe you'd rather not the state have executed him, but the fairly unremarkable way in which his case proceeded through the legal system seemed to bother no one.

I'm interested to see how justice is done in the recent attempted mall bombing in Rockford, IL (hometown of Cheap Trick, by the way). The dude who's allegedly behind the plot has an Arabic sounding name, and was quoted in the article linked to above saying words like "jihad," "Allah," blah blah blah. So now he's not just any guy who wants to blow up a mall, he's a terrorist who wants to blow up the mall. He's gone from a common criminal to a guy we should send to Syria to be tortured for the inside dope on al Qaida.

Sometimes I wonder what the point of this distinction is. It this an important point to make? That he is acting for "religious" reasons? To me, the terrorist connection just means that this particular attempt at violence is in fact a hate crime. I've heard conservatives say that the reason they don't like the notion of the hate crime is because is has to do with intent. "We already have laws against murder," they say, "we don't need to legislate someone's thought process." I'd say that it has more to do with a latent hostility towards the typical recipients of hate crimes, but, whatever, that's just an opinion. Anyway, if introducing the notion of the hate crime is so bad, if that would be tantamount to the "thought police," then why so important to label a particular crime an "act of terror" rather than just a regular ol' violent act? Seems to me the intent behind the crime is very important indeed.

No Point

Shorter Jonah Goldberg:

The fact that my point isn't valid isn't the point.

Liberals V. Libertarians [Jonah Goldberg]

At the end of the day, they can't get along because liberals won't find this funny.

Please: No emails from liberals saying "Hey! I thought it was funny!" I'm illustrating a point here.

Quick! Someone tell Kos that the dream is dead!

Sympathy

No blogging lately becasue it's tough typing with only your left hand. You see, I broke my arm last Saturday. Needed surgery to repair. It's in a cast now. And then on Memorial Day Monday, I decided that I wasn't hurt quite enough, so while playing soccer with my 1 year old in my parents' backyard, I thought I'd better kick a tree instead of the ball. So now my toes are broken too.

Shaq

I was watching game 4 of the Heat-Pistons series the other night and, for a moment, right after the 7' 1" 325 lb. Shaq blocked an errant entry pass, corraled the ball, and went coast to coast for a tremendous lay-up, and THEN did an abrupt U-turn and (even faster!!!) streaked up court to get back on defense, I was sure that nothing Shaq could do from then on would impress me quite as much as this latest flourish. Well, that was before I read this story about Shaq arresting perverts by subduing them using his mere presence as a weapon. Absolute genius quote:

"I do not have to run after the people or tackle them. They always surrender peacefully[.]"

I bet. Show me the kiddie porn sicko who would have the stones to stand up to Shaq. Little bastards probably wet their pants right then and there.


12 sided salute to Superficial for the link.

Jet Fuel

Credit where credit due. Donald Rumsfeld has authorized the USAF to explore alternate fuels for its fleet of jets.

"Energy is a national security issue," said Michael A. Aimone, the Air Force assistant deputy chief of staff for logistics.

The United States is unlikely ever to become fully independent of foreign oil, Mr. Aimone said, but the intent of the Air Force project is "to develop enough independence to have assured domestic supplies for aviation purposes."

Not exactly as ambitious as I'd like, but I welcome any progress at all towards the development of alternate fuels.

8,000 MPG

A British inventor has developed an engine that gets 8,000 miles to the gallon. No that is not a misprint. 8 oh oh oh. How fast does it go? How durable is the motor? Can it go from 0 to 60 in less than a week? I have no idea. The point is, the technology for high efficiency cars is available.

Now why, during this time of struggle against terror financing oil sheiks, isn't our number one priority to put those assholes out of business for good? Why don't we put our heads together, build a better mouse trap, demand accordingly higher fuel standards from auto makers, and git 'er done?!?! Didn't we say right after 9/11 that we'd go after their financing? Freeze the money? Well, let's get to it!

But of course we all know the reason why we don't do this. Because the collateral damage in an assault of this nature would be the many billions of dollars of profits earned each year by the US oil industry. And since the GOP "is" the oil industry, this will never happen so long as they are in power. So the money keeps flowing. So terror continues.

Oil is a funny thing. It brings great wealth who those countries who control it, but it requires no ingenuity, no entrepreneurship, no perserverance. Just a drill. Therefore the country's rich are rich, the country's poor are poor, all without the benefit of a functioning economy. But what would happen if no one wanted their primary export? If the sheik's money tree dried up? Something tells me that the civilization that invented algebra, chess, clocks, soap, coffee, and a hundred other things, would begin the long climb out of their backwards fundamentalist state and into a new age of resourcefulness and general enterprise. At least that's what I hope would happen.


Link via Drudge.

GOP Out of Ideas

Finally. Someone has finally bothered to point out that it is not the Democrats but the Republicans who, when it comes to strengthening our nation, have no ideas whatsoever.

The Republicans' problem is not simply their inability to run their government and wage their war of choice, it is also their bankruptcy of ideas. On taxes, the Republican legislative leaders' top priorities are to make permanent the tax cut on investment income and to repeal the estate tax -- economics, as ever, for our wealthiest 1 percent. (This at a time when the entire theory of trickle-down has been negated by the propensity of U.S. corporations to use their shareholders' investments to expand abroad rather than at home.) On energy, the notions of tougher fuel economy standards and mandating a shift to renewable energy sources are so alien to the Republicans' DNA that they come forth with such proposals as Bill Frist's $100 rebate, the most short-lived legislative initiative in recent memory.

Good point about the obvious shortfall of the trickle-down "philosophy." Lest anyone forget, let me say once again that the entire GOP legislative agenda consists of just one single idea: to enrich themselves and their friends. Period.

A Better Tomorrow

Anyone else think the recent stock market gains are just the pricing in of an expected Democratic takeover and a likely return to sanity and wealth creation?? I have my suspicions. All I have say is this: buy now and you won't be sorry.

Operation Photo-Op

Since President Bush is such a famously hard worker, such that he can't even travel from point A to point B without "deciding" something, it makes perfect sense that the U.S. is spending $6.1 billion needed to build a fleet of 23 new presidential helicopters. I think whoever made the call to order 23 was a particularly astute fellow, because you never know when your other 22 helicopters will be in the shop for a tune up. Always good to plan for contingencies.

Of course, in addition to causing me to wonder how many miles of new Chicago subway could be built with these funds, what struck me about the new helicopter order was the following spec:

Cabin: Measuring eight feet wide and 25 feet long, the cabin will include a lavatory and a galley kitchen. The fold-down stair spares the president from ducking during photogenic entrances and exits.

Because we all know that nothing gets between the President and his photo-ops. See, every time the President has to duck through a doorway, the terrorists win.

Oil Profits

I see how higher oil prices mean higher gas prices, but I still don't understand why higher oil prices mean higher and higher profits for the oil refining companies like Chevron and Exxon. If someone had a lemonade stand, and all of a sudden the price of lemons went through the roof, wouldn't you figure that their margin would go down? Usually raw materials being expensive is a bad thing, right? Someone will have to explain this to me.

While you're at it, explain to me why these same oil companies enjoying record profits need multi-billion dollar government subsidies to go look for oil. I wouldn't want to see any special tax on ultra-high profits (as if profits can get too high), but I can see no good reason at all why Joe Sixpack working 10 hours a day should be forced to make donations to the most profitable industry on earth.

If R & D is too expensive, well golly gee maybe we should give that ol' capitalism thing a try and see what alternatives emerge. Maybe use some of those billions to build some subways in some of our major cities. You know, get people out of their cars, reducing demand for gas, and (presto!!!) lowering the price of oil.

Round 2

Much has been made of the latest Sy Hersh piece warning of imminent war in Iran. Scary stuff. But it's all President this, White House official that, Pentagon this, military planners that. But going to war with Iran is not a choice that the President has the authority to make. We don't have to sit here wondering whether or not the President will do this or that. Congress still has to approve that sort of thing, right? We haven't completely discarded our constitution have we? Or will we soon be hearing that the War on Terror allows the president to direct our military as he sees fit?

Google Love

I am slowly edging up the list. The current Google search of Dodecahedron has me in seventh place. My great blogging goal is to come in first one glorious day.

Memory Bowl

I'm sure the pro-"thriving criminal underworld" fanatics will slip this news into their collect back pockets as yet more evidence that "drugs are bad."

In a study of long-term and shorter-term marijuana users, researchers in Greece found that both groups performed more poorly on tests of memory, attention and other cognitive abilities than a comparison group who'd only occasionally used the drug.

Long-term users—who'd smoked four or more joints per week for at least 10 years—showed the greatest deficits.

In other news, people who ate fast food every day for 10 years are grossly obese, people who drink too much have liver problems, and too much sugar can cause adult-onset diabetes in children.

Go Birds!

Birds and frogs triumph over sprawl.

Give money to conservation groups. Sometimes they win.

No Thanks

ESPN.com has a poll question up that nearly made my head explode. In the end, I couldn't even choose. Every time the mouse cursor hovered too near to either option, the dry heaving became too much for me. The question was this: If given a choice (and ironically enough, you are), which player would you cheer for - Barry Bonds or Terrell Owens. Yuk!

Healthy Hillary

As I often do, I was perusing the blog of the award-winning goddess, Her Slitheressness, and read a predictably excellent post about the last couple first ladies. Within the post were a few quotes where the various speakers dared to dig up the incredibly sexist and insulting memes "Hillary playing assistant president" and "who is Hillary to foist healthcare policy on us, 'cause the little (first) lady wasn't elected to anything."

The question that comes immediately to mind, of course, when confronted with such idiocy is "Who the heck elected Karl Rove to anything, and exactly what is he playing at?" Something tells me this is a query the Joe Scarboroughs of the world (who says things which are alternately encouraging and infuriating) would not know how to answer.

Yeah...No...

I have noticed a new phrase that is slowly seeping into our language. That phrase is as follows: Yeah..no...blah blah blah. Think I'm crazy? Listen for it, and you'll be amazed at a) how often you hear it and b) how often you find the words "yeah...no..." coming out of your very own mouth. I'm no Samuel Johnson, but the lexicographer in me approximates the meaning of "yeah...no..." as "I'm not sure if you understood me, so let me reiterate my point." I find that one says this curious (and inherently contradictory) phrase most often when confronted with an imperfect (so one thinks) response to/summarization of an idea that one has expostulated. While you may be bored to weeping by conjectures on spontaneous language formation, I find it fascinating. And it's my blog, so there.

"So you like language?"

"Yeah, no, I just like how little phrases just sprout from the ether. I don't think anyone sat down and decided that they were going to say 'yeah...no...,' it just happened. I say it myself sometimes; I certainly didn't ever plan on it."

We Are The Media

This started as a comment on a post at Suburban Guerrilla, but ended up as here on SOTU as a full-fledged blog post. Aren't you lucky.

Below is a quote from said post at SG.

This is one of the things that infuriates me about the media and, like Duncan, I just don’t get it. Clearly, there’s something about the emphasis on credentialism that’s attracting journalists who are constitutionally incapable of questioning the status quo.
...

But of course, media ownership is concentrated in a handful of corporate interests who are more interested in making money than they are in saving democracy.

While I agree that the media is composed primarily of snivelling sycophants, yearning for the opportunity to place their lips firmly on the ass of power, I think it is largely a waste of time to wonder why they don't cover the important issues of the day. The answer is quite simple, and one which Susie hit on herself in her post: money.

Corporate media has one job. Reporting the news? Try again. Uncovering the truth? You've got to be kidding me. The one task that corporate media is interested in achieving is turning a profit. Period. There's no either/or here. No publisher sits in his office weighing whether she wants to a) save democracy and in the process disappoint stockholders because everyone flipped over to FOX or b) say to hell with the country let's run another story where we can show topless, fuzzed-out ladies getting mammograms. Whatever stories get the high ratings are the stories they go with. If a detailed report about the dangers of the unitary executive will cause people to flip the channel, it ain't gettin run. If a week-long series on Natalee Holloway makes the papers fly off the shelves, look for part 2 next quarter.

I feel the only things that we can do are a) try to put them out of business by not watching/reading/listening etc. and b) reporting the truth ourselves. The press is whoever has a press. In the Internet age, we all have a press. We are the media. We should not expect anything from The Media, we should expect things from ourselves. The Media, in terms of something that exists outside the sphere of influence of the common citizen, is dying. We are returning to the age of the pamphleteer, when passionate individuals like Thomas Paine invigorated a nation. We should realize the tremendous, increasing power we have to influence what topics are discussed.

"The Media" (if that label even means anything these days) will NEVER be a public service. The company balance sheet will inform them what "their job" is, not national interest. Let's not waste our valuable energy wondering why our favorite newspapers don't print stories about things that matter or why the same familiar reporters keep asking the same softball questions. Just like we don't waste our time wondering why Exxon funds anti-global-warming research. Just like we don't waste our time wondering why insurance companies lobby against national healthcare.

The press is not something that is out there, but something that is "in here" **pounds chest**. Expecting/hoping/becoming infuriated that the certain outlets that we deem "the press" or "the media" or whatever don't take the health of our nation seriously enough only serves to empower those outlets and enfeeble our own efforts. If a question needs asking, we need to be the ones to ask it. We need to get our own reporters in that press room. We need to work to erase the "unserious" stigma that unfairly plagues bloggers. The more we infiltrate the press conferences, the more the truth will be out. This can be done and it must be done. But it must be done BY US. Wishing that someone else would do it for us is as good as giving up.

Ben the Pen

I love how right-wing cheerleaders keep referring to Ben Domenech's blatant and repeated plagiarism as a "mistake." Even more, how his "owning up" to these "mistakes" may just vault him up to the moral high ground.

Here's the news, chumps: habitual plagiarism is not a "mistake," but a symptom of a fundamental and more or less permanent flaw in one's character. Ben is a liar and a thief. Period.

Fur

I'm not going to judge anyone else for wearing fur, but after seeing this graphic video, I cannot in good conscience wear it myself. Not that I ever have worn fur, so this isn't exactly a huge sacrifice, but it is a little sad knowing that I will never be Mr. Male Fur Coat Wearer.

I caution you on the graphic video. It's pretty disturbing. How so? The animals are skinned alive. Repeat. SKINNED ALIVE.



12 sided salute to the incredible juggernaut, Hedonistica.

Duke Puke

I have three words to say now that Duke has been unceremoniously bounced from the NCAA tournament:

Ha. Ha. Ha.


Oh yeah, I have three words for J.J., too:

C. B. A.

Tired

I’m tired. So tired. Last Tuesday I was in Philadelphia. I stood where brave and treasonous patriots drafted the Declaration of Independence. I stood in the room where these same men debated the Constitution. When I got home to Chicago, I joked with friends that now that I’ve been to the Philly, where they created our sacred documents, I should make sure to plan a trip to Washington, D.C., where our leaders are currently destroying them. Bookends of a sort, eh? But kidding aside, as our volunteer tour guide spoke about the replica furniture, I thought to myself that such discussion of how to govern a nation, the fierce counterpoint that forged our nation’s structure and ideals, is now extinct. Maybe we will drag it up from the deep one day, like a coelacanth hooked on an unsuspecting line, but I begin to despair. The Republican position on nearly every issue takes but one consideration into account: how will this make us and our big contributers richer. The health of the nation is of absolutely no concern to them. The sole measure of control that they seek to achieve is the destination of the vast sums of money that they alone have the power to route. What use would such people have for the conversations that shaped the USA into the greatest, most powerful nation in the world? Of what interest is the breathtaking potential of its people and its resources? It simply doesn’t matter. And so many people, so many, just don’t care. They just don’t. And I’m tired of hearing them. I am tired of talking to them. Tired of giving them examples. Tired of asking them to consider this or this or this or this. Tired of talking about the fundamental disconnect between trying to fight terror and prop up the US oil industry at the exact same time. Tired of pointing out that being against the war in Iraq doesn’t make you a terror sympathizer, that it doesn’t even mean you’re not a hawk! I’m tired of being asked to, metaphorically speaking, “prove gravity.” I don’t mean to say that the liberal position and, by extension, liberals are always, or even often, right, correct, moral, etc. But just that we have one side arguing for the liberal position and the other side arguing…what? They argue nothing. Just nothing. Savvy taxpayers are encouraged to purchase gas guzzling SUVs. Wiretaps now are authorized without judicial oversight. Medicare is so expensive not because of any incredible drug benefit to seniors, but the jaw-dropping giveaways to pharmaceutical companies. And why? Thinking in terms of nation building, that is, building OUR NATION, the terms within which the architects of our nation considered the effect of each proposal, thinking in those terms, what actual positive effect could these policies have? The care that went into the intricate system of checks and balances, the framers no doubt waking in the middle of the night having thought of yet another contingency to plan for, another roadblock to throw across the path to corruption, where is this care in the modern Republican party? What gets them up in the dead of night? A foolproof way to funnel war profits to campaign contributors? Another ploy to solidify the pulling of the R lever into an article of faith for millions of ignorant and deluded fundamentalists? Or maybe it’s just me losing sleep. Sometimes I just can't force myself to see the gusts for the typhoon. Why point out the odd whipping palm and uprooted street sign when you’re STANDING IN THE MIDST OF A HURRICANE? Can’t you see it? Can’t you see it? It wasn’t always like this. It’s doesn’t have to be this way. It could be so much better. But I get so tired of saying it. Tired of trying to scream my voice above the driving wind and rain. So tired.

Also when I was in Philly, I stopped by the local chapter of Drinking Liberally (a vibrant group of dedicated individuals) and got to meet Upyernoz, a tremendous blogger, and my first and best “blog-friend.” We had a great time talking about blogging, politics and life with the rest of the gang. Everyone made me feel very welcome. A fantastic time.

Ski Jumping

I don't understand why ski jumping has judges. Who cares how pretty they look when they land? Isn't it enough that one dude goes farther than another dude? What the heck? The idea that the guy with the "perfect telemark landing" wins, while the other guy, who goes balls to the wall and ekes out a few more feet while swinging his arms or whatever, has to settle for silver, is beyond the paltry scope of my comprehension.

Woulda Shoulda

See, when a country blatantly does have/will have nukes, e.g. Iran, France is not afraid to say so. Contrast that with what they said about a country, say, Iraq, that inspectors were more or less on their way to declaring completely free of nukes, or the capability to create them, when we hurriedly invaded the place. Why are we supposed to hate France again?

I, for one, would have liked our armed forces to be free to muster all the strength they had these last four years to present a viable threat to a international pariah like Iran. Instead, we've pissed ourselves dry in Iraq. Seems that the net result of our actions in Iraq have simply been to embolden Iran. Seems to me we should have been spending this time doing exactly the opposite. Pity.

Anti-Fundamentalists?

A bunch of churches in Alabama have been burned in apparent arson recently. When I read the headline, I immediately thought that it was racially motivated violence, but seems that mostly White churches have been burned right along with mostly Black churches. Being that these churches were the homes of Baptist congregations in rural Alabama, let's go out on a limb here and assume these parishioners take the Bible pretty literally. Perhaps what was under attack here wasn't a particular ethnic community, but the ideology itself. Could these burnings be the work of anti-fundamentalist extremists?

"Defeat fundamentalism at all costs! We believe nothing we read!"

Cockroach Zombies

Here is a must read post about a wasp called Ampulex compressa. It could be the coolest insect of all time. It has evoled a mechanism by which it controls the mind of a cockroach to such a degree that it does not bother the cockroach in the slightest bit to be slowly devoured from the inside by the wasp larvae. Hell yeah!!!

And then there's the sting. Ampulex does not want to kill cockroaches. It doesn't even want to paralyze them the way spiders and snakes do, since it is too small to drag a big paralyzed roach into its burrow. So instead it just delicately retools the roach's neural network to take away its motivation. Its venom does more than make roaches zombies. It also alters their metabolism, so that their intake of oxygen drops by a third. The Israeli researchers found that they could also drop oxygen consumption in cockroaches by injecting paralyzing drugs or by removing the neurons that the wasps disable with their sting. But they can manage only a crude imitation; the manipulated cockroaches quickly dehydrated and were dead within six days. The wasp venom somehow puts the roaches into suspended animation while keeping them in good health, even as a wasp larva is devouring it from the inside.

The only other organism that could hope to achieve this level of mind control is Chuck Norris.

12 sided salute to Hedonistica for the fantastic link.

Tim Johnson

I'm really disappointed in Tim Johnson. He's not even up for re-election until 2009. Does he really think a vote against Alito will damage him so much that he will be denied a chance to practice "running scared" politics for another term? Does he really think that the people of South Dakota will even remember this?

Manufacturing Runs

Another good move by Reid to stagger the announcements from the Dem Senators regarding their no votes on Alito. It creates sort of a faux momentum of opposition to the nomination. For the record, I would oppose Alito because he doesn't seem to understand that the president has no power to draft or interpret laws. That said, there wasn't much of an opposition buzz, so again, kudos to Reid for trying to create one. Sort of the political equivalent, if it works, of the "Rickey Run" in basball.

Right Click

I am staunchly pro-Mac, but I think it's time that they entered the world of the "right click." It's just too well established to be ignored by anybody. My prediction: if Mac adopts the "right click," their market share would go up 10 points in the first year. Seriously, if they didn't mind letting Intel chips power their computers, you'd think they could see to having the two button mouse that everyone on the computing earth is used to by now.

Pot Pill

Every time another piece of research like this is published, I incrementally raise the odds of the pharmaceutical industry developing a "pot pill." I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing. Perhaps a synthesized version would be even better than the genuine article since smoke in one's lungs is generally not a health-promoting activity. Still, I think that it'd be unfortunate that a casualty of this nearly inevitable development will be the loss of the medical marijuana "beachhead" that the anti-prohibitionist forces had established. Hopefully progress on that front will be so substantial at that point that it won't matter. One can hope. Cause it'll be pretty hard to argue for granny's right to smoke grass when the doctor can just prescribe her a pill. Oh well. Big Pharma 149, The Rest Of Us 0.

Seriously, I wonder what will the commercials for the pot pill be. People running through fields and on the beach of course, but will it be interspersed with clips from Cheech and Chong movies? Snoop Dogg should definitely be asked to appear. I, for one, am looking forward to it. Still, I don't think any drug commercial can top the Levitra ad when the dude throws the football through the tire swing, grabs his wife, then backhands the ball into the shed. Ahh, metaphorical imagery.

Pet Peeve

Pet peeve of the day: department store cosmetics counter employees who wear white lab coats.

What I've Been Saying All Along

This is a direct quote from Mike Scanlon, top aide to Tom Delay.

"Simply put, we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them. The wackos get their information form [sic] the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet, and telephone trees."

First Class Stamp

So the Postal Service is raising their prices again. You'd think they would know about these things a few days before the change went into effect, though. 12 sided wife bought a hundred roll of 37 cent stamps not 3 days ago, only to find out that in less than a week they'd be out of date. One would hope that someone at the Post Office would say to her, "hey, you might want to buy a hundred roll of 2 cent stamps while you're here, because the price is going to 39 cents on Jan. 9th."

I don't understand why they don't just create a single stamp, put a giant "F" on it for first class, and charge whatever they charge. Anytime the post office saw a stamp with an "F," it'd be all good. But how would the Post Office know what was paid for these "F" stamps? Wouldn't people would just stock up on cheaper stamps, you say? And this would be a bad thing? Au contraire, the time value of money being what it is, it far more desirable to have large amounts of cash right now. Who knows, it might be the biggest boon in the history of the USPS.

Face Transprant

Where can you get a healthy dose of both Engrish and face transplant news, without ever leaving the compfort of your computer chair? Right here!!

The only hope for her now is a facial transplant. She said she would rather die from the surgery than committed suicide one day in autism.

Huh?

Feisty

I'm watching the Orange Bowl this evening and one of the announcers referred to Coach Joe Paterno as "feisty." For my money, feisty is the single most stealthily demeaning adjective in the English language.